I contend that voting is always an important matter, and I have and always will continue to encourage as many people to vote as possible. However, there is a particular importance to the upcoming March primaries and November general elections this election cycle.
More important than any other partisan issue, this upcoming primaries and general election all factor into the redrawing of congressional districts. Every 10 years, the United States employs a ton of people to calculate and run a census. (Like a ton, a ton, a ton of people. Check the graph below. If Trump starts talking about how many people the federal government employed in a couple of years, just ignore him, because the increase in employment is expected.) Based on the census, states redraw districts, which affect representation for the 10 years, until the next census is completed.
In fact, most state legislatures control the redistricting process for state legislative and congressional districts in their respective state. Specifically, 37 state legislatures control district redrawing, and 42 legislatures control congressional redrawing, with drawing plans passing like simple legislation. Texas, specifically, and six other states (Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Oregon) have a special backup commission employed whenever the legislators does not pass a plan.
This all means that if state legislators can manipulate the redrawing of districts, then they can also manipulate representative blocks and the likelihood of a party’s candidates’ successes for the next decade. This redrawing of districts for political gain is called gerrymandering.
Don’t believe me? Redistricting maps back in the 2010 election were targeted by Republicans as millionaire Art Pope funneled $30 million into winning state legislature seats. By picking up 675 seats, Republicans took control of 12 legislatures. As the Washington Post reported, after the redistricting process, Republicans held a 234-201 majority in the House, even though Democrat candidates won 1.4 million more votes in the House than Republicans.
David Wasserman, writing for the The Gerrymandering Project, noted that, “ Republicans didn’t achieve historic shares of power in the House and state legislatures because they engaged in skullduggery or used fancy new technology. . . They achieved it because they enjoyed a wave election in 2010, earning enough power in state houses to redraw almost five times as many congressional districts (210 to 44) as Democrats in 2011. As a result, Republicans’ share of House seats was 4 to 5 percentage points greater than their share of the major-party vote in 2012, 2014 and 2016.”
And Democrats are no strangers to the gerrymandering game, either. The biggest reasons why Democrats are not as successful with gerrymandering efforts is because many Democratic voters are located in college towns and big cities. The geographical congregation of Democratic voters allows for easier packing efforts of those districts, lessening the overall impact of a straight up popular vote. The Voting Rights Act also prevents diluting majority-minority districts, so overwhelming voting blocks cannot be spread out across multiple districts. Simply because the Democrat party has a harder time exacting gerrymandered states doesn’t mean that the party has no interest in having gerrymandered states.
The overall point? Both major parties are interested in maintaining political control through redistricting. The 2018 and 2020 elections are important, because candidates elected into office in November will also help redraw districts by the time the 2020 census is completed. These candidates are incentivized to redraw districts that ensure their seat for reelection, giving more political power to their respective party and less political power to their constituents.
For example, a county in Texas that typically votes Republicans into office, let’s say Williamson County, may be considered a safely Republican district. Republicans vying for office in this county are not incentivized to legislate in the interest of their constituents, because they can still expect their constituents to vote them into office come election time. Instead, candidates will legislate to appease their party, so that they can win in the primaries, and any significant campaign donors that also increase a candidate’s chance at winning.
Voting in the 2018 (and 2020) primaries helps realign political power where it should be–with constituents, and not the parties and donors. Primaries this year help do this, because the people elected to run in the general election in November can be more ideally selected to represent constituents’ interests.
Participating in the primaries is another mechanism that allows constituents to elect candidates that they trust. When a constituent does not trust any candidates, then the primaries also allow a constituent to employ strategic voting, so that she can encourage future elected officials to pay more attention to his or her constituents. For example, I might be in a safely Democrat district, and I might also self-identify as a Democrat. However, I might want to vote for a Republican because I want to encourage the Democrat party to not take my vote for granted.
When the elected official voted into office has the potential to gerrymander my vote into irrelevance, I certainly have an imperative to pay attention to, and have some say in, who is elected into that office.
Vote in the primaries March 6th. Early voting in Texas begins February 20th. THE LAST DAY TO REGISTER FOR THE PRIMARIES IS FEB. 5TH.